Zombie standard could be decent.
We have Diregraf Ghoul, that one 2/1 zombie for 1, and Stitcher's Supplier to fill out the 1 slot.
Stitcher's Supplier also helps fill up your yard.
We have Ammet Eternal for more oomph.
Death's Baron turns your 1 drops into nasty little buggers.
Isareth and Liliana to act as reanimation for your cheap zombies
Lili and Wayward servant help add more reach with drain.
Oh and we have Crucible of Worlds to pull any lands we dredge away
- Registered User
Member for 6 years, 9 months, and 3 days
Last active Sun, Oct, 7 2018 23:49:46
- 1 Follower
- 2,310 Total Posts
- 161 Thanks
Jan 2, 2018She is pretty much par for the course for Orzhov... I dont see why everyone is so fixated on Edgar. She doesnt go in Edgar tribal Vamps. She is pretty much a par for the course Tokens+Grave Pact+Sac Outlet Orzhov commander. No different than nearly every other Orzhov commander...Posted in: The Rumor Mill
Sep 6, 2017SnowBunny posted a message on Poll on what MTGS feels is the most disliked ArchetypesPosted in: Commander (EDH)Quote from scoed »I honestly like a healthy balanced meta with all kinds of decks and strategies. Stax, group hug, and chaos requires you to think outside of the norm for your deck and adapt, and that is good. Control is my favorite kind of deck to play, and I love playing against it. Trying to read a control player and answer their answers is a blast in my opinion. Agro keeps thing honest and punish slow stops and over costed nonsense. And ramp/reanimator is the norm in commander. What's to hate? And while overpowered combo decks for their meta aren't fun, but combo forces you to pack answers and that is good.
The real problem isn't with a particular deck strategy it is with an unbalanced power level. I play at more than one LGS, and I play at home with friends and the power level is way different with these different metas. If I take my more competitive decks to my home play group of mostly poor and new players, it doesn't matter which style I play no one will have fun as the winner is determined at the start. If I play the precons I play at home, at the most competitive LGS I play at, I won't have fun as I would be dead to start. Power level is more important that deck strategy in regards to the fun in the game in my not so humble opinion.
I voted for the record fo combo. It is the least interactive and interaction is what I love about Magic. Plus some combos are so slow and durdle quite a while before they win. I think combo is needed in the meta but in my opinion it is the least fun to play against and with. For the record I do play a few different combo decks myself.
I will never understand all the whining about deck types. In an ideal world there would be decks of all types in a meta forcing adaption and thought. If any one type of deck becomes to common play becomes boring. Bring on stax, MLD, chaos, group hug, control, aggro, combo, ramp, reanimation, tempo, pillow fort, synergy decks, good stuff, and any off the way deck some mad deck builder can build. AS long as the power levels are somewhat balanced things should be fun.
I can MOSTLY agree with this. The one except I have is group hug. Group Hug has no intention of winning, or if they do, it is usually so astronomically unlikely that they effectively never win. The only thing they do is disrupt the game, regardless of how well made, or how poorly, your deck actually is.
Sep 3, 2017SnowBunny posted a message on Poll on what MTGS feels is the most disliked ArchetypesSo pretty straight forward. What archetype do you dislike most? Comment below on why.Posted in: Commander (EDH)
Personally, I hate Group Hug. Decks that don't bother trying to win and just kingmake another player are beyond pointless to me and honestly, take all the fun out of the game.
Sep 3, 2017Posted in: Commander (EDH)Quote from Boyachi »1) EDH allowed them to use the (now trash) legends/chronicles Elder Dragon Legends and other things that you wouldn't bother with in a tournament.
2) Okay, group is not fun for everyone, namely the people who are only in it to win it. However, I'll say this: group hug is ALWAYS less sucky than being taken out early in the game and having to sit for 30+ minutes while everyone else plays just because someone Goku'd and "saw an opening and took it"(Goku vs Recoome, Dragon Ball Z).
The player base is made up of people playing to win and people playing for fun. Not all people playing to win are heartless sociopaths that only see their fellow players as opponents that need to be eliminated. Not all people playing for fun are doing so while taking five minute turns and only doing ten seconds of magic because they are socializing instead while using crappy cards because they barely put in the money/effort to play the game yet insist on making the most seasoned player's life miserable while trying to get the table-noob to win. If it were a song battle it would be Jason Paige (I wanna be, the very best, that no one ever was!) vs Miley Cyrus (It's not about how fast I get there, it's not about what's waiting on the other side, it's the climb!).
As far as game length, you have people that grew up with Tony Hawk, Angry Birds, Street Fighter, a bunch of games with a limited amount of tries/times in short intervals. However MtG is still owned by Wizards of the Coast, the same people who own AD&D. RPGs are long affairs, they make a game of monopoly look like a Super Mario 3 speed run.
TL;DR: It is okay to not like group hug, but don't knock the players who run it. They tried and succeeded in balancing the playing field, which apparently is an effective counter against a single player's ramp.
Grouphug does NOTHING but ruin games.
For Instance, I was playing Rakdos Aggro vs a Locust God deck and a Pheddelgriff deck. The Turn order went, Locust, me, then flying hippo. I summarily lost in a no time flat because the Grouphug player played a bunch of symmetrical hug effects, which benefitted The Locust God before me. I could not keep up because we were drawing 5 cards a turn, meaning 5 dudes for him every turn before casting a single spell. There was no way I could win, no matter how good my deck was. THAT is what grouphug does. Group Hug does nothing but king make one player and screw everyone else over. And if you are not even trying to win, then why bother playing? What is the point if all you are trying to do is screw everyone else up?
Sep 2, 2017Posted in: Commander (EDH)Quote from Buffsam89 »Quote from Outcryqq »Quote from Buffsam89 »
We deter Stax in our shop ... At the table where I just want a break from 1 on 1 matchs, take your try hard elsewhere.
... My time is valuable, waste your own, not mine.
An opinion I disagree with, yet it highlights what I think is an important point for this topic - just make sure everyone at the table is on the same page about what type of game you are about to play. When you play with me, unless I hear otherwise, I will "try hard" (to win). I will destroy your resources, or employ any number of strategies to try and win. But if I'm at your shop, and someone politely says to me before I sit down that this group prefers no MLD and no Stax, then I can go in with different expectations and pull out a weaker deck or one that plays within those parameters. But without having that conversation, don't expect me to water down my playstyle or play a weaker deck in order to make sure the game plays out in such a way where you feel you didn't waste your time. My time is valuable too.
Well, we play EDH based on its underlying philosophy of being a social format. Winning is fine, but not at all costs. Why go through the trouble of sitting down at a table of your primary goal is to alienate the other 3 people playing with you. At the that point, you are being just as selfish as the ramp guy who want to play all the ramp spells in the world. Ignoring that is my problem with this thread. You are not smarter, more skilled, or a better person for employing such strategies. I tend to think of folks with your mindset as poor losers who would much rather take their ball and go home, and before you say otherwise, resources would be considered the ball, and your goal is to take that away, hence the analogy. Its a great strategy for 1v1, but not for a group. Which is where I side with the OP's point, your social skills would be considered lacking if your go-to for MP is resource denial, with or without knowing playgroup guidelines ahead of time.
So by your logic, control as a whole should be banned yes? After all, the end result of Stax is the same as other control decks, stop you from playing your stuff. So, we should just all play combo or battlecruiser?
Aug 29, 2017Posted in: Commander (EDH)Quote from Boyachi »Stalwart defense. Commander 2016.
The reason I say this is because the format started out as a casual game. If you take three cards out of that deck he take away it's one condition but keeping all the group hug. There's so much in that deck to make the game fun for everyone playing, not just the person controlling the deck
Guh group hug is NOT fun.
1) You are wrong about the origin of commander. Commander was born from EDH. EDH was made by judges who were bored and wanted to do something new. EDH was degenerate from the get go. Any format that allows things banned in legacy is going to be degenerate. So stop with that hipster nonsense.
2) Group Hug is not fun. What is the point of playing if you are not evem going to try? All group hug does is kingmake someone and just hate on the players who are actually doing well. It drags out games unnecessarily and are just obnoxious decks.
As for the topic on hand:
2017: toss up between vamps or dragons. Dragons are the strongest by far... if you get a good land draw. The land base is atrocious.
2016: Breya by and far.
Jun 28, 2017Posted in: The Rumor MillQuote from Manite »Quote from prismatic elf »Red has been powered down for a long time , like since Khans block . It should be about time for the pendulum to swing back don't you think?
Yeah, sure looks nerfed to me. Red consistently sees play in all of the current or former top Standard decks right now. Not to mention they really don't want to push monocolor strategies hard.
And how long before Fatal Push rotates out and then people start complaining that black doesn't have any good removal in Standard? Or maybe they'd like to lament the dismal state black discard is in right now because it doesn't have precious Thoughtseize?
Amonkhet is a grindy block. Red is not a grindy color. It's impossible for every color to always be at its best, and honestly rarely should ever be. The lower the peak is, the more breathing room there is for different cards and strategies. I imagine Ixalan with its Dinosaurs and Pirates will probably bring more red goodies to the table.
Mardu Vehicles is not really a red deck... it is a splash red...
Copy Cat only played red because Harnessed Lightning and Saheeli...
Marvel is a dead deck and, again, not really a red deck. Just a deck that splashed red.
a Classic Red Aggro or Red Burn hasnt been a thing for a while...
Jun 28, 2017Could be interesting with Temmet... a Sort of Token deck... Lets not forget we also got Anointed Procession, so if we play a sort of UW Control/Token deck, it could work maybe... or mayber Esper?Posted in: The Rumor Mill
Jun 26, 2017Maybe he could work as a commander for a sort of Mono-W Hatebears/control deck? Use lots of control elements to drag the game out and win with your PW and use him as a tutor to find your win con.Posted in: Commander (EDH)
Jun 26, 2017Tribal Changelings actually works pretty well if your commander is The Reaper King... everything turns into vindicate on a stick. If you want to go "lords tribal" look at Mistform Ultimus. Since he counts all creature types, he turns into a weird Voltron with lots of lords xD.Posted in: Commander (EDH)
Jun 26, 2017Posted in: The Rumor MillQuote from SyntheticDreamer »I'm getting a Phyrexian Negator vibe from this card - an undercosted 5/5 with a manageable drawback. I doubt this will be as good as Phyrexian Negator was in its heyday, but this definitely looks solid for at least Limited. I could see some casual Suicide Black decks using this as well.
Well negator was so powerful because Dark Rit was a card... Turn 1 Swamp->Dark Rit-> Negator was rough..
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.